Presenter: 施佩汝 劉冠廷 何元臣 陳裕美 洪家榮 Approximation Algorithms for Quickest Spanning Tree Problems.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Iterative Rounding and Iterative Relaxation
Advertisements

1 EE5900 Advanced Embedded System For Smart Infrastructure Static Scheduling.
The Theory of NP-Completeness
1 NP-Complete Problems. 2 We discuss some hard problems:  how hard? (computational complexity)  what makes them hard?  any solutions? Definitions 
Approximation Algorithms Chapter 5: k-center. Overview n Main issue: Parametric pruning –Technique for approximation algorithms n 2-approx. algorithm.
Combinatorial Algorithms
CSC5160 Topics in Algorithms Tutorial 2 Introduction to NP-Complete Problems Feb Jerry Le
Complexity 11-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov NP-Completeness.
Computability and Complexity 23-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Search and Optimization.
Complexity 15-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Hierarchy Theorem.
Approximation Algorithms: Combinatorial Approaches Lecture 13: March 2.
Computability and Complexity 15-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov NP-Completeness.
1 Optimization problems such as MAXSAT, MIN NODE COVER, MAX INDEPENDENT SET, MAX CLIQUE, MIN SET COVER, TSP, KNAPSACK, BINPACKING do not have a polynomial.
Approximation Algorithm: Iterative Rounding Lecture 15: March 9.
NP-Complete Problems Reading Material: Chapter 10 Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4 only.
The Theory of NP-Completeness
Near-Optimal Network Design with Selfish Agents By Elliot Anshelevich, Anirban Dasgupta, Eva Tardos, Tom Wexler STOC’03 Presented by Mustafa Suleyman CIFTCI.
A Distributed Algorithm for Minimum-Weight Spanning Trees by R. G. Gallager, P.A. Humblet, and P. M. Spira ACM, Transactions on Programming Language and.
Computability and Complexity 24-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Approximation.
Job Scheduling Lecture 19: March 19. Job Scheduling: Unrelated Multiple Machines There are n jobs, each job has: a processing time p(i,j) (the time to.
Coloring Algorithms and Networks. Coloring2 Graph coloring Vertex coloring: –Function f: V  C, such that for all {v,w}  E: f(v)  f(w) Chromatic number.
Clique Cover Cook’s Theorem 3SAT and Independent Set
Approximation Algorithms Motivation and Definitions TSP Vertex Cover Scheduling.
The Theory of NP-Completeness 1. Nondeterministic algorithms A nondeterminstic algorithm consists of phase 1: guessing phase 2: checking If the checking.
1 The Theory of NP-Completeness 2012/11/6 P: the class of problems which can be solved by a deterministic polynomial algorithm. NP : the class of decision.
Approximating Minimum Bounded Degree Spanning Tree (MBDST) Mohit Singh and Lap Chi Lau “Approximating Minimum Bounded DegreeApproximating Minimum Bounded.
1 Introduction to Approximation Algorithms. 2 NP-completeness Do your best then.
Lecture 22 More NPC problems
Approximating the Minimum Degree Spanning Tree to within One from the Optimal Degree R 陳建霖 R 宋彥朋 B 楊鈞羽 R 郭慶徵 R
CSE 024: Design & Analysis of Algorithms Chapter 9: NP Completeness Sedgewick Chp:40 David Luebke’s Course Notes / University of Virginia, Computer Science.
EMIS 8373: Integer Programming NP-Complete Problems updated 21 April 2009.
CSE 589 Part VI. Reading Skiena, Sections 5.5 and 6.8 CLR, chapter 37.
Unit 9: Coping with NP-Completeness
NP-Complete Problems. Running Time v.s. Input Size Concern with problems whose complexity may be described by exponential functions. Tractable problems.
Lecture.6. Table of Contents Lp –rounding Dual Fitting LP-Duality.
The full Steiner tree problem Theoretical Computer Science 306 (2003) C. L. Lu, C. Y. Tang, R. C. T. Lee Reporter: Cheng-Chung Li 2004/06/28.
CS6045: Advanced Algorithms NP Completeness. NP-Completeness Some problems are intractable: as they grow large, we are unable to solve them in reasonable.
1 EE5900 Advanced Embedded System For Smart Infrastructure Static Scheduling.
NPC.
CSC 413/513: Intro to Algorithms
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing December 2, 2004.
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing December 7, 2005.
CSE 421 Algorithms Richard Anderson Lecture 27 NP-Completeness Proofs.
TU/e Algorithms (2IL15) – Lecture 12 1 Linear Programming.
The NP class. NP-completeness Lecture2. The NP-class The NP class is a class that contains all the problems that can be decided by a Non-Deterministic.
Introduction Wireless Ad-Hoc Network  Set of transceivers communicating by radio.
 2005 SDU Lecture15 P,NP,NP-complete.  2005 SDU 2 The PATH problem PATH = { | G is a directed graph that has a directed path from s to t} s t
CHAPTER SIX T HE P ROBABILISTIC M ETHOD M1 Zhang Cong 2011/Nov/28.
Trees.
Approximation algorithms
Theory of Computational Complexity Probability and Computing Chapter Hikaru Inada Iwama and Ito lab M1.
ICS 353: Design and Analysis of Algorithms NP-Complete Problems King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals Information & Computer Science Department.
The Theory of NP-Completeness
NP-Completeness A problem is NP-complete if: It is in NP
The NP class. NP-completeness
Richard Anderson Lecture 26 NP-Completeness
Richard Anderson Lecture 26 NP-Completeness
Computability and Complexity
Autumn 2016 Lecture 11 Minimum Spanning Trees (Part II)
CS154, Lecture 16: More NP-Complete Problems; PCPs
ICS 353: Design and Analysis of Algorithms
Richard Anderson Lecture 25 NP-Completeness
Introduction Wireless Ad-Hoc Network
NP-Complete Problems.
CSE 6408 Advanced Algorithms.
EE5900 Advanced Embedded System For Smart Infrastructure
The Theory of NP-Completeness
CS154, Lecture 16: More NP-Complete Problems; PCPs
Winter 2019 Lecture 11 Minimum Spanning Trees (Part II)
Autumn 2019 Lecture 11 Minimum Spanning Trees (Part II)
Presentation transcript:

Presenter: 施佩汝 劉冠廷 何元臣 陳裕美 洪家榮 Approximation Algorithms for Quickest Spanning Tree Problems

Author 2 Refael HassinAsaf Levin

Outline 3 Introduction A 2-approximation algorithm for the quickest radius spanning tree problem Inapproximability of the quickest radius spanning tree problem The quickest diameter spanning tree problem Discussion

施佩汝 Introduction

5 G = (V, E): undirected multi-graph for each e Є E l(e) ≧ 0: length c(e) > 0: capacity r(e) = 1/c(e): reciprocal capacity

Example 6 node l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1l(e) = 1, r(e) = 2 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1

Introduction 7 For a path P that connects u and v, The length of P: l( P ) = Σ e Є P l(e) The reciprocal capacity of P: max e Є P r(e) t(P) = l(P) + σ r (P): transmission time σ = 1

Example 8 node l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1 l(P) = 2, r(P) = 2, t(P) = 4 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1l(e) = 1, r(e) = 2

Introduction 9 Quickest Path Problem (QPP) Find a path of given pair of vertices u, v Є V, whose transmission time is minimized

Example 10 u node v l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1l(e) = 1, r(e) = 2 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1 l(P1) = 2, r(P1) = 2, t(P1) = 4

Example 11 u node v l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1l(e) = 1, r(e) = 2 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1 l(P1) = 2, r(P1) = 2, t(P1) = 4 l(P2) = 1, r(P2) = 1, t(P2) = 2

Example 12 u node v l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1l(e) = 1, r(e) = 2 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 1 l(P1) = 2, r(P1) = 2, t(P1) = 4 l(P2) = 1, r(P2) = 1, t(P2) = 2

Introduction 13 In broadcast networks, one usually asks for a small maximum delay of a message sent by a root vertex to all the other vertices in the network Quickest Radius Spanning Tree Problem rad t (T) = max v Є V t(P T root,v ) is minimize

Example 14 root node l(e) = 2, r(e) = 0 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 0

Example 15 root node l(e) = 2, r(e) = 0 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 0 rad T = 2

Introduction 16 In other communication networks, one seeks a small upper bound on the delay of transmitting a message between any pair of vertices Quickest Diameter Spanning Tree Problem diam t (T) = max u, v Є V t(P T u,v ) is minimize

Example 17 node l(e) = 2, r(e) = 0 l(e) = 1, r(e) = 0 diam T = 2

Introduction 18 Shortest Paths Tree (SPT) Given an undirected multi-graph G = (V, E), with a special vertex root Є V. e Є E is endowed with a length l(e) ≧ 0 T = (V, E T ): spanning tree such that for every u Є V, l(P T root, u ) = l(P G root, u ) SPT (G, root, l)

Introduction 19 Contribution A 2-approximation algorithm for Quickest Radius Spanning Tree Problem. For any ε > 0, unless P = NP there is no approximation algorithm with performance guarantee of 2 – ε for the Quickest Radius Spanning Tree Problem. A 3/2-approximation algorithm for Quickest Diameter Spanning Tree Problem. For any ε > 0, unless P = NP there is no approximation algorithm with performance guarantee of 3/2 – ε for the Quickest Diameter Spanning Tree Problem.

劉冠廷 A 2-approximation algorithm for quickest radius spanning tree problem

Problem 21 Find a spanning tree T of G such that is minimized.

Algorithm 22

Example 1 root 1 23 l 2, r 0 l 0, r 1 l 2, r 0 G Rad t (T’) = t(root, 1) = 2 23

root Example 2 l 1, r 0 l 0, r 2 l 1, r 1 l 1, r 0 l 1, r 1 G Rad t (T’) = t(root, 3, 4) = 3 24

Time It is dominated by the time complexity of step1 O(m 2 + mn logm), n = |V|, m = |E| Y. L. Chen and Y. H. Chin, “The quickest path problem”,

Theorem 2 The algorithm is a 2-approxiamtion for the QUICKEST RADIUS SPANNING TREE PROBLEM root OPT = l(P) + max r(P) r(e) 26

Theorem 2 root OPT = l(P) + max r(P) l(e) 27

Theorem 2 + ) 28

何元臣 Inapproximability of the quickest radius spanning tree problem

2-approximaiton for quickest radius spanning tree 30 Unless P = NP, no (2- ε ) approximation algorithm exists for any ε > 0. Steps: No approximation algorithm with a performance guarantee of (3/2 – ε ). An example showing quick_radius is a 2-apporixmation algorithm at best. Use ideas from previous two parts to form main result

3/2 lower bound on the approximation ratio 31 Reduction from SAT SAT(Boolean satisfiability problem) Boolean expression written using only AND, OR, NOT, variables and parentheses. Literal = variable An expression is said to be satisfiable if logical values can be assigned to variables to make the formula true. NP-Complete Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) (X1vX3’vX4’) (X2vX4)

3/2 lower bound on the approximation ratio 32 E3 : l(e) = 0.5, r(e) = 0 E1 : l(e) = 0, r(e) = 1 E2 : l(e) =0.5, r(e) = 0 X1 X2 X3 X4 root leaf X1’ X2’ X3’ X4’ C1 C2 (X1vX3’vX4’) (X2vX4)

3/2 approximation low bound 33 Find Spanning Tree on G If the formula is satisfiable, rad t (T) = 1 If the formula is not satisfiable, rad t (T) ≥ 3/2

Find the Spanning Tree 34 T = (V, E T ), = root to leaf from E 1, all intermediate vertices are false literals (root, li) from E 3, one edge from E 2, a true literal to each clause

Find the Spanning Tree 35 If the formula is satisfiable, rad t (T) = 1 rad(root – leaf) = rad(root – C1) = rad(root – C2) = 1

Find the Spanning Tree 36 If the formula not satisfiable, rad t (T) ≥ 3/2 if the path from root to leaf (P) contains an edge from E 3 (at least one)  rad t (T) ≥ 3/2 otherwise, for some clause C j, all of its literals are in P, rad t (root – C j ) ≥ 3/2

On using only quickest path edges 37 G’: the union of a quickest root – u path in G for all u V. claim: spanning tree T’ of G’ satisfies rad t (T) ≥ (2- ε ) OPT for all T’ of G’. (OPT: optimal solution) G k = 5, δ > 0

On using quickest path edges 38 Two best quickest radius spanning trees on G rad t (T) = δ + 1

On using quickest path edges 39 rad t (T) = 2-(1/k) rad t (T) ≥ 2-(1/k)

On using quickest path edges 40 the approximation ratio then is And we are going to show the bound is tight 2- (1/k) δ+1 ≥ 2 - ε

Theorem 4 If P ≠ NP, then there is no ( 2 - ε )-approximation algorithm for the QUICKEST RADIUS SPANNING TREE PROBLEM for any ε > 0 41 陳裕美

E3 : l(e) = j/k, r(e) = 0 E1 : l(e) = 0, r(e) = 1 E2 : l(e) =1 - j/k, r(e) = 0 root X1j X2j X3j X4j tail j-1 head j tail j headj+1 X1’j X2’j X3’j X4’j C1j C2j (X1vX3’vX4’)^(X2vX4) Level j 42

rad t (T) = 1 (the optimal case) 43

44 E3 : l(e) = j/k, r(e) = 0 E2 : l(e) =1 - j/k, r(e) = 0 E1 : l(e) = 0, r(e) = 1 SAT: X1 = false, X2 = true, X3 = true, X4 = false root X1j X2j X3j X4j tail j-1 head j tail j headj+1 X1’j X2’j X3’j X4’j C1j C2j (X1vX3’vX4’)^(X2vX4)

rad t (T) = 1 45 Root (head 1 ) to tail k-1 : E1 : l(e) + r(e) = = 1 Root to C ij : E2 + E3 = j/k + (1 – j/k) = 1

rad t (T’) ≠ 1, we want to prove rad t (T’) ≥ 2-1/k 46

E3 : l(e) = j/k, r(e) = 0 E1 : l(e) = 0, r(e) = 1 E2 : l(e) =1 - j/k, r(e) = 0 root X1j X2j X3j X4j tail j-1 head j tail j headj+1 X1’j X2’j X3’j X4’j C1j C2j (X1vX3’vX4’)^(X2vX4) 47

If the SAT formula is not satisfied 48 Look at the path from head to tail For every level j = 1,.., k-1, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a path from head j to tail j case I There is some level j, 1 ≤ j ≤ k-1, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a path from head j to tail j case II Look at the path from root to C ij ----case III

But before the proof.. Claim: for every q = 1,2,…..,j, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a path from head q to tail q, then l(P t root,tail j ) ≥ j/k. 49

Proved by induction 50 For j = 1, the claim is trivial since P t root,tail j must have an edge from E2 ∪ E3 Assume that the claim holds for all previous level, we prove it for j.

Proved by induction 51 By assumption, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a tail j – head j path. – Has an edge from E 3 l(P t root,tail j ) ≥ j/k – Has two edges from E 2 l(P t tail j-1,tail j ) ≥ 2/k and add l(P t root,tail j ) 2/k + (j-1)/k = (j+1)/k > j/k E3 : l(e) = j/k, r(e) = 0 E2 : l(e) =1 - j/k, r(e) = 0

Now back to the proof!! rad t (T’) ≠ 1, we want to prove rad t (T’) ≥ 2-1/k 52

If the SAT formula is not satisfied 53 Look at the path from head to tail For every level j = 1,.., k-1, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a path from head j to tail j case I There is some level j, 1 ≤ j ≤ k-1, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a path from head j to tail j case II Look at the path from root to C ij ----case III

Case I For every level j = 1,.., k-1, (V, E T ∩E 1 ) does not contain a path from head j to tail j. 54 By claim– for every q = 1,2,…..,j, (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) does not contain a path from head q to tail q, then l(P t root,tail j ) ≥ j/k. Because now j = k-1: l(P t root,tail k-1 ) ≥ k-1/k = 1 – 1/k

Case II There is some level j, 1 ≤ j ≤ k-1, (V, E T ∩E 1 ) does not contain a path from head j to tail j. 55 WLOG suppose 1,…, j-1 does not contain a path form head j to tail j. otherwise j,…, k-1 contains a path (V, E T ∩ E 1 ) from head j to tail j. For j ≥ 2, By claim for j-1, l(P t root,tail j-1 ) ≥ (j-1)/k. – If (tail j-1,head j ) is E T, then l(P t root,tail j-1 ) ≥ (j-1)/k. – If (tail j-1, head j )is from E 3, then it connects a vertex from a level at least j to root. l(P t root,tail j-1 ) = j/k ≥ (j-1)/k. If j = 1, then l(P t root,tail j ) ≥ (j-1)/k

Case I + Case II 56 We have l(P t root,tail j-1 ) ≥ (j-1)/k in E 1. E3 : l(e) = j/k, r(e) = 0 E1 : l(e) = 0, r(e) = 1 E2 : l(e) =1 - j/k, r(e) = 0 root X1j X2j X3j X4j tail j-1 head j tail j headj+1 X1’j X2’j X3’j X4’j C1j C2j (X1vX3’vX4’)^(X2vX4)

Case III Look at the path from root to C ij 57 Since the formula is not satisfied by this truth assignment, there is a clause vertex C jp such that all of its neighbors are in E 1. E3 : l(e) = j/k, r(e) = 0 E1 : l(e) = 0, r(e) = 1 E2 : l(e) =1 - j/k, r(e) = 0 root X1j X2j X3j X4j tail j-1 head j tail j headj+1 X1’j X2’j X3’j X4’j C1j C2j (X1vX3’vX4’)^(X2vX4)

Case III 58 l(P t root,C jp ) = (1 – j/k ) + (j-1)/k = 1 – 1/k t(e) = l(e) + r(e) = 1 - 1/k + 1 = 2 – 1/k Therefore, rad t (T’) > = 2 – 1/k

洪家榮 The quickest diameter spanning tree (QDST) problem

In QDST problem 60 In this section we consider the quickest diameter spanning tree problem. We present a 3/2-approximation algorithm, and prove that unless P = NP this is the best possible. Denote by OPT the cost of an optimal solution, Topt = (V,Eopt), to the quickest diameter spanning tree problem. Denote by MDT(G, l) the minimum diameter spanning tree of a graph G where the edges are endowed with a length function l.

The algorithm 61

Proof: The claim clearly holds if the path contains an edge e with. Assume otherwise (that the claim does not hold), and let be such that there exists and contains an edge e with, and are edge-disjoint. Then, and the claim follows. For a tree T, denote by uvy z Lemma 5 Let. For every pair of vertices

Theorem 6 Algorithm quick diameter is a 3/2-approximation algorithm for the quickest diameter spanning tree problem. 63 Proof: 1.By the optimality of (for the minimum diameter spanning tree problem), 2. By Lemma 5, Therefore, by 1, 3. Since 4. By 2 and 3, 5. By 1, 6. By 5, 7. By 4 and 6,

Theorem 7 If P≠NP, then there is no (3/2 -ε)-approximation algorithm for the quickest diameter spanning tree problem for any ε> Proof: We prove the claim via reduction from SAT. We take the graph G from the proof of Theorem 4, and add a new vertex leaf, that is adjacent only to root by an edge e with l(e) = 1 and r(e) = 0. By the proof of Theorem 4, if the formula can be satisfied, then there is a tree, T, whose radius is 1 (by extending the tree derived in the proof of Theorem 4 with the edge (root, leaf)). The diameter of a tree is at most twice its radius. Therefore, there is a spanning tree T such that

Since leaf is adjacent (in G) only to root, each feasible solution is decomposed into a spanning tree over the original vertex set and the edge (root, leaf). By the proof of Theorem 4, if the formula cannot be satisfied, then every spanning trees T has a vertex u (u ≠ leaf) such that and. Therefore, Given ε > 0 we can pick an integer k such that 65

leaf (l, r) = (1, 0) 66

施佩汝 Discussion

68 Consider the transmission time along paths instead of the usual length of the path. There are numerous other graph problems of interest that ask to compute a minimum cost subgraph where the cost is a function of the distances among vertices on the subgraph. Defining these problems under the transmission time definition of length opens an interesting area for future research.

Thank You 69

70

71 洪家榮 何元臣 施佩汝 劉冠廷 陳裕美 ( 左到右 )

圖論演算法 … 72

讓人心曠神怡 73